🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to ban social networking access for young people below 16 is creating waves worldwide. Lawmakers, campaigners, and guardians are watching intently to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

European Momentum

Across Europe, a increasing chorus of nations are considering parallel bans.

• Denmark has stated a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader arguing that smartphones and platforms are "stealing our youngsters' innocence". The policy is expected to be passed soon.
• Norway is preparing to implement a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to protect young people from the "influence of the algorithms".
• Ireland is developing a digital wallet to authenticate the user details of social media users. Officials have indicated that an similar ban remains "an options in reserve".
• In Spain, the leader has urged parliament to approve a proposal raising the minimum age for accessing social media to 16.
• In France, the head of state has proposed a ban for children below 15, and a legislative committee has recommended a related step, potentially involving an overnight "screen time restriction" for adolescents.
• The administration in The Netherlands has recommended families to block their children from social media up to the age of 15.

Across the European Union, the EU parliament has adopted a non-binding statement supporting a ban for minors unless guardian approval is given. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the resolution does not create binding law.

"A strong age restriction is a good foundation," said a leading MEP driving the initiative.

Britain: A Cautious Approach

For the United Kingdom, the government has kept open a future ban, arguing that "no measure is off the table" but insisting any policy must be "supported by conclusive evidence".

Previously, support built behind a legislative effort to enact restrictions on social media use by minors, but it was eventually modified. However, the government committed to conduct more studies the issue.

Campaign organizations have raised apprehensions. An organization set up by the loved ones of a teenager who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing online content argues that a simple age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "cliff edge" of harm when young people become eligible.

"This ban is a reaction to the inability of the social media companies to build products and services that are appropriate and age appropriate for children," said a influential peer.

America: A Decentralized Approach

Stateside, legislation is mostly happening at the state government level against a backdrop of federal inaction.

• Utah mandates adult approval for those under 18 to use social media and controls overnight use.
• The state of Florida has enacted a law banning children under fourteen from accessing social media, though it is entangled in court battles.
• The state of Virginia has passed a rule limiting minors to one hour of social media access per day, with extra time needing a guardian's okay.
• Georgia, Tennessee, and The state of Louisiana have also passed measures demanding guardian approval for minors to set up social media accounts.

Even with widespread concern and suggestions from various figures to follow Australia's lead, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

Worldwide Outlook

Outside of the West, other states are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to prohibit social media for under-16s effective next year.
• The Brazilian authorities has increased the minimum age for one major platform to 16.

But, world agencies adopt a more nuanced stance. Unicef has warned that age-based restrictions carry risks and "could have unintended consequences". The body points out that social networks can be a "vital connection" for marginalized youth and that government action should not be a "excuse" for platform operators to prioritize child safeguards.

As this global discussion continues, the steps of Australia and others indicate that states globally are less and less prepared to stand by for the industry to act voluntarily.